P.Dhanalakshmi v. The Inspector Of Plice,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.09.2019
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RMT. TEEKAA RAMAN H.C.P. No. 2830 of 2018 P.Dhanalakshmi ... Petitioner -vs1.The Inspector of Police, AWPS, Adyar Police Station, Chennai.
2.K.Srinivasan 3.S.Parimala 4.The Child Welfare Committee, Chengalpattu - 603 002 Kancheepuram District.
(R4 impleaded as suo motu vide order dt. 22/4/19) ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the first respondent to produce the body of the petitioner's daughter Parkavi, aged about 6 years, the detenue from the illegal custody of 2nd and 3rd respondents before this Court and hand over her to the petitioner.
For Petitioner :
Mr.S.Marshall For Respondents :
Mr.R.Prathap Kumar Addl. Public Prosecutor for R1 *Mr.D.Stephen for R2 & R3
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.] The petitioner is the mother of the minor child aged about 7 years studying in third standard. Seeking custody of the child/detenue, the present habeas corpus petition has been filed.
2. Considering the sensitivity of the issue involved, this Court earlier asked the District Child Welfare Committee, Chengalpet to file a report after examining the parties including the child. Similarly, the Assistant Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, Government Chengalpattu Medical College and Hospital, Chengalpattu was also asked to file a report.
3.We have perused the recommendations by the Probation Officer and also the report of the Child Welfare Committee. The report of the Child Welfare Committee, which we do not want to record in this proceedings would suggest that it would be appropriate in the interest of justice to allow the minor child to be with the father. After perusing the same, we directed the learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 to produce the child. The child's statement also indicates the same.
4. For the reasons as indicated above, we do not also wish to record the statement of the child. Suffice it to state that there is no illegal detention involved and the interest of the child is well safeguarded at the hands of the second respondent.
5. Accordingly, the Habeas Corpus Petition stands dismissed. However, liberty is given to the petitioner to file appropriate petition before the jurisdictional Court, if so advised. We make it clear that our observations are only prima facie in nature, the jurisdictional Court is expected to decide the matter on its own merits without being influenced by any of the observations.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CJ Conf) dated:11/10/2019 *Appearence in respect of R2&R3 carried out as per letter of the Respondent dated 26.11.2019 -s/dAssistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar
mmi/ssm To 1.The Inspector of Police, *to be substituted AWPS, Adyar Police Station, Chennai.4.
For the order already 2.The Child Welfare Committee, despatched on 07.11.2019 Chengalpattu - 603 002 Kancheepuram District.
3.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
+1cc to Mr.D.Steepahan,Advocate SR.No. 78620 (19/11/2019) +1cc to Mr.D.Steepahan,Advocate SR.No. 78620 (22/11/2019) H.C.P. No. 2830 of 2018 mr A.SK(14/10/2019) A.SK(02/12/2019)